Style's make fights........

**S A M U R A I** · 10-19-2008, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

You jacka$$es on this forum dont seem to understand this concept
when I started to box in the amateurs about a year ago I was taught this concept before even learning my jab, with different fighters you have to fight different ways. yesterday night was a great example.

statements that need to be made.

1. Kelly pavlik is not trash

2. B-hops win doesnt do **** for calzaghe's resume,because kelly and joe fight differently

3. kelly was suited for bernards style ....and kinda reminds me of tito trinidad

4. if calzaghe fought bernard again the fight will look the same but the outcomemight be different

5. if calzaghe and pavlik fought I would choose pavlik because joe doesnt know how to fight backing up and pavlik doesnt fight going backwards.

6.B-HOP ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Point 5 is f**king ridiculous. Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously saying garbage like that?

Also you're wrong about point 2. Whether you like it or not, people will see Calzaghe's resume in a better light now that Hopkins destroyed America's greatest white boxing hope, but Hopkins was beaten by Calzaghe.

And point 1: Pavlik is trash against elite competition who he can't bully. That would include Calzaghe.

Point 6 proves you're a biased fanboy.
You're 17 though, I see you have a lot of learning to do.

100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

**brooklyn kid** · 10-19-2008, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by F-R-K-O

Point 5 is f**king ridiculous. Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously saying garbage like that?

Its not ridiculous its the truth if calzaghe and pavlik fight

niether will get tired or back up, it would be like a slug fest and pavlik would
win. you fail to understand that the only thing joe brings into the ring that is
so fearsome is his workrate, that wont bother kelly if he stands in there and
fights with him.....now who's stronger kelly or joe?

**S A M U R A I** · 10-19-2008, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

Its not ridiculous its the truth if calzaghe and pavlik fight

niether will get tired or back up, it would be like a slug fest and pavlik would
win. you fail to understand that the only thing joe brings into the ring that is
so fearsome is his workrate, that wont bother kelly if he stands in there and
fights with him.....now who's stronger kelly or joe?

Kid, I'm too old to be arguing with you. I have followed boxing for 31 years. I can teach you a lot.

Calzaghe is far stronger than kelly Pavlik. Joe Calzaghe walks around at almost 200 pounds between fights. Joe is a BIG super middleweight.

100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

**Ryn0** · 10-19-2008, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

You jacka$$es on this forum dont seem to understand this concept
when I started to box in the amateurs about a year ago I was taught this concept before even learning my jab, with different fighters you have to fight different ways. yesterday night was a great example.

statements that need to be made.

1. Kelly pavlik is not trash

2. B-hops win doesnt do **** for calzaghe's resume,because kelly and joe fight differently

3. kelly was suited for bernards style ....and kinda reminds me of tito trinidad

4. if calzaghe fought bernard again the fight will look the same but the outcomemight be different

5. if calzaghe and pavlik fought I would choose pavlik because joe doesnt know how to fight backing up and pavlik doesnt fight going backwards.

6.B-HOP ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Points 5. Calzaghe would throughly outbox him, Hopkins was faster, unorthadox and had a higher workrate those were the key things that Hopkins had to win and he pushed Kelly back several times so Kelly does fight backward.

Calzaghe is faster than Kelly, has a much higher workrate than Kelly, is unorthadox he'd be in Kelly's chest constantly pushing Kelly back and widely outscoring him.

**Ryn0** · 10-19-2008, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

Its not ridiculous its the truth if calzaghe and pavlik fight

niether will get tired or back up, it would be like a slug fest and pavlik would
win. you fail to understand that the only thing joe brings into the ring that is
so fearsome is his workrate, that wont bother kelly if he stands in there and
fights with him.....now who's stronger kelly or joe?

The ONLY advantage Kelly has is his Power and as it had been shown it doesn't work as effectively above 160.

Calzaghe would do the same thing Hopkins did but at an even higher pace but proberbly not hurt him as much at this stage in Joe's career.

**S A M U R A I** · 10-19-2008, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by Ryn0

The ONLY advantage Kelly has is his Power and as it had been shown it doesn't work as effectively above 160.

Calzaghe would do the same thing Hopkins did but at an even higher pace but proberbly not hurt him as much at this stage in Joe's career.

Pavlik would look like Lacy against Joe.

BrooklynKid, you said Joe can't fight going backwards. I ask you, how many Joe Calzaghe fights have you studied? And I believe you said you were boxing yourself, so I emphasize the word "studied".

Joe likes his opponents to come to him. Watch the Lacy fight again, please.

100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

**brooklyn kid** · 10-19-2008, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by F-R-K-O

Point 5 is f**king ridiculous. Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously saying garbage like that?

Also you're wrong about point 2. Whether you like it or not, people will see Calzaghe's resume in a better light now that Hopkins destroyed America's greatest white boxing hope, but Hopkins was beaten by Calzaghe.

And point 1: Pavlik is trash against elite competition who he can't bully. That would include Calzaghe.

Point 6 proves you're a biased fanboy.
You're 17 though, I see you have a lot of learning to do.

when you say im wrong about point 2 .... you obviously dont know about boxing.

have you ever boxed a day in your life to even talk to me like that ????

while i may be 17 I have boxed before and you havent....its sorta like larry merchant trying to talk boxing with roy jones.

**S A M U R A I** · 10-19-2008, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

when you say im wrong about point 2 .... you obviously dont know about boxing.

have you ever boxed a day in your life to even talk to me like that ????

while i may be 17 I have boxed before and you havent....its sorta like larry merchant trying to talk boxing with roy jones.

Yes, I boxed as an amateur for 3 years.

100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

**Ryn0** · 10-19-2008, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by brooklyn kid

when you say im wrong about point 2 .... you obviously dont know about boxing.

have you ever boxed a day in your life to even talk to me like that ????

while i may be 17 I have boxed before and you havent....its sorta like larry merchant trying to talk boxing with roy jones.

You've "boxed" have you? At what level have you boxed, at club level? at district/country level?

Since when do you need to box to look at Calzaghe's resume and say that Hopkins winning boosts his win over Hopkins?

Style's make fights........